Communique about the ICC: Small Episode of a Declining Proletarian Organization… (Nov. 5th, 2015)

The ICC of the "Culture of Debate" has just censored the intervention of one of our members on its discussion forum (only in English [1]). In itself, the event is today insignificant and only confirms the probably irreversible political drift of this organization. We just want to inform all our readers and the revolutionary camp.Since we were mentioned and even quoted in the "discussion", one of our members intervened (of course without hiding that he was an IGCL member) [2], to attempt to bring back the participants to the political ground and make them distance themselves from the psychological typical of the ICC. Here is the message of our comrade Stavros so that everyone can judge our behaviour and policy :

"Hello Fred, Alf and other sympathizers/members of the ICCWe think that you are over-psychologizing the matter. This is a habit that you may have picked up from the current ICC. We are not ”pissed at” Pale Blue Jadal, we don’t “like” the ICT and we don’t have “rage” towards the ICC. Our positions are based on political arguments which have never been responded to by the ICC but which we invite you to consider critically. We encourage you to read our articles and think about our analysis, particularly about the historical situation and what we call the historical course, as well as our intervention within the class struggles. We suggest that you focus on the political arguments and stay off of the psychologizing and moralizing terrain which is nothing but an excuse to avoid real debate by allowing one to dismiss the entirety of the arguments on the grounds that those producing them “hate” the ICC or are motivated by personal animosity.Fraternal regards, Stavros for the IGCL"

The ICC has decided to censor our comrade’s intervention by decreeing the ban of our group (set up in 2013 and whose majority of members have never been in the ICC) to its public meetings and on its Discussion Forum. But no matter the pretexts for the ICC, the main goal is above all to avoid the serious political confrontation and to ignore the critical arguments. Doing so, and if we refer to the proletarian point of view, this censorship policy which means denying the reality of the proletarian camp today, can only weaken even more the last living forces of this organization, and above all its sympathizers, young or not. Its course is no more than a slow agony made by an opportunist drift of the idealistic and councilist order as for the political positions (one can read our political statement about the 20th Congress of the ICC in Revolution or War #1); and, as for the organizational level, it is made of liquidation of its press, atonia of its territorial sections which don’t intervene, or so little, and of demoralizations and resignations of members, old and young.No hatred, no anger, no particular personal resentments in our political assessment as communist group, that is as collective, organized and centralized body at the international level: just a political position established from real material facts (the present ICC’s positions and its real activity). That we are obliged to repeat it so often, says a lot about the penetration within the revolutionary camp of bourgeois ideology aiming at destroying the method of the workers movement which is made of political debates and confrontations. Yet, within the revolutionary camp, the ICC has precisely become the main vector of this penetration with its theories on clanism and personal hatred (roots of all the organizational crisis of the working class movement according to it), on the "humane and eternal" morality above the classes [3], on the "revolutionary indignation", on the "parasitism", etc. All come to distort and discredit any real confrontation of the political positions and thus any real "debate" with the aim of the political clarification which is indispensable for the process driving to the future international communist party. At this level too, the political fight against opportunism remains actual.

[2] n general, we don’t intervene in discussion forums because these locations, or spaces, favour informalism, individualism, "immediate" responses, even emotive, to the detriment of real debates and political confrontations, of arguments and methodical reflection. Even less in the forums of the ICC where our intervention can only animate a place which, precisely in terms of debate and political clarification, is moribund – it suffices to cast a glance at the majority of the posts and at their real political interest. The rare times we do intervene, it is essentially to make clarifications or corrections. We refer our readers to our article on Bourgeois Democracy, Internet and the so-called Individual’s Equality (Revolution or War #3)